Abolish Death Penalty India: Dashwanth

Monday, December 24, 2018

HC notice to police on techie's plea against death sentence (Tamil Nadu)

Press Trust of India | Chennai Last Updated at April 11, 2018 16:15 IST

The Madras High Court today ordered issuance of notice to police on an appeal filed by a 23-year-old techie against the death sentence awarded to him by a lower court in connection with the rape and murder of a minor girl here last year.

A division bench of Justices S Vimala and Ramathilagam issued notice to the inspector of Mangadu police station. A Mahila court in Chengalpattu had on February 19 convicted S Dhasvanth in the case of rape and murder of seven-year-old girl. He had lured the child, into his flat at Mugalivakkam here, using a dog and strangled her to death after raping her. The accused then dumped the body in travel bag and later burnt it on a highway.

A charge sheet was filed against Dhasvanth and the lower court convicted Dhaswanth for the offence. Stating that the trial court judge grossly erred in finding the accused guilty based only on conjunctures and surmises not amounting to evidence, the 23-year-old techie filed the appeal.

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/hc-notice-to-police-on-techie-s-plea-against-death-sentence-118041100701_1.html (Accessed 24 December 2018)

Sunday, December 23, 2018

Techie sentenced to death for rape and murder of seven-year-old girl (Tamil Nadu )

PTI Feb 19, 2018 22:24:29 IST

A 23-year-old techie was sentenced to death, the maximum punishment under law, by a court for the rape and murder of a seven-year old girl last year.

Dashwanth, 23 year old Techie

The Mahila Court in Chengalpet also sentenced Dashwanth, an engineering graduate, to 46 years of rigorous imprisonment on different counts. He had burnt the body of the girl, his neighbour, after he raped her on 6 February 2017, which drew widespread public outrage. While out on bail in the rape and murder case, he had allegedly killed his mother and escaped with her jewellery in December before being caught in Mumbai. Proceedings in that case was pending. The Mahila Court judge, justice P Velmurugan, held Dashwanth guilty on all charges under the Indian Penal Code and those under the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act (POCSO Act).

In the 135-page judgment, the judge referred to the 2012 New Delhi gangrape case and said that the instant case merited death sentence. "There is no reason to award minimum punishment. If we don't give maximum punishment, people will lose faith in the judiciary. There is every reason to award only maximum punishment in this case," Justice Velmurugan observed. The techie did not show any emotions as the judge read out the judgment. However, when the judge was leaving the court hall, Dashwanth called out to him, but Justice Velmurugan walked away.

Dashwant was convicted under sections 363 (kidnapping), 366 (kidnapping, abduction), 354-b (assault or use of criminal force on woman with intent to disrobe), 302 (murder), and 201 (causing disappearance of evidence) of the IPC and read with several sections of the POCSO for the offences including aggravated sexual assault. The counsel for the victim's father V Kannadasan said there were no eyewitnesses at all, and the case was decided based on circumstantial evidence and scientific evidences such as DNA and superimposition tests. It is decided that the child was murdered, he added.

Reacting to the verdict, the victim's father got emotional and said "justice has been delivered". Later, Dashwanth's counsel said they would appeal against the verdict. The court examined 30 witnesses, 45 documents and 19 pieces of evidence. The girl went missing from the apartment complex she stayed in with her family in Mugalivakkam on 6 February, 2017. The Chennai police arrested Dashwanth, who also lived in the same building. He had apparently lured her by saying he would allow her to play with his dog, and then sexually assaulted and killed her. He was first arrested in February last year for the rape and murder of the girl and granted bail in September. Dashwanth was arrested on 6 December in Mumbai but escaped from police custody the very next day. He was caught again in a joint operation with the Maharashtra police on 8 December. On 2 December, he had allegedly killed his mother Sarala and escaped with her jewellery.

The Death Penalty Scenario in India

India is one of 193 countries that retains the death penalty. Some judges have delivered landmark verdicts upholding the rights of death row prisoners, while debates continue advocating abolition or reform of sentencing policies. The Indian government remains committed to retention, asserting executions occur only in “rarest of rare” cases. The death penalty applies to crimes including murder, kidnapping, terrorism, desertion, inducement to suicide of a minor or mentally-retarded person, and in certain cases of rape. Outrage over child rape and murder has intensified these discussions. After an unofficial eight-year moratorium, the government executed Ajmal Kasab (Mumbai attacks) in 2012 and Afzal Guru (Parliament attack) in 2013, both covertly and immediately after mercy petitions were rejected. Prior to this, Dhananjoy Chatterjee was executed in 2004 after 13 years on death row. Following these, many mercy petitions have been rejected, creating fear among death row convicts. Courts continue to hand down death sentences at an increasing rate. Empirical studies highlight the plight of death row prisoners. The India Exclusion Report 2017-18 found fair trial rights largely denied, with convicts often marginalized by caste, religion, poverty, and education. The Death Penalty Research Project (2015) documented socio-economic profiles and experiences of death row prisoners. Dr. Reena Mary George’s studies (2014, 2009) emphasized poverty, social exclusion, and dignity as central to death row experiences, and examined the human rights impact of the penalty. According to the National Crime Records Bureau 2015, 101 prisoners were on death row, with many sentences commuted to life. The “rarest of rare” doctrine introduced by the Supreme Court in the 1980s has not substantially limited death sentences, which have increased over the decades. Justice Joseph (2018) reaffirmed the Bachan Singh judgment but urged restriction of the death penalty to only those cases meeting its criteria. While updating the blog and conducting my own empirical studies, I observed the heinous nature of the crimes that were committed and thought about the families, about their loss, about the victims who for no fault of their own died. If I lost my relative or a dear friend, would I still oppose death penalty and would I still advocate to abolish the death sentence? Having worked in the criminal justice system and also having the seen the other side, where often it is the marginalized, vulnerable and oppressed who are on death row makes me want to advocate for abolition of this punishment. Victims should definitely get justice for their loss, for their pain. No one should escape the rule of law. As long as humanity exists; crime will exist. Should we not re-consider our sentencing policies? Reena Mary George